FanHouse Congress

Every Monday during college football's endless offseason, The FanHouse Walk will put last week's stories to bed and deliver the essentials to bridge that agonizing space between now and September.

Mr. BCS Goes To Washington -- Except I have a feeling Jimmy Stewart would find some way to rail against the BCS, however wrongheadedly. You see, the big word in the halls of Congress on Friday was "fair" but don't let that confuse you. While the Mountain West and certain members of Congress are using the fairness term to stoke public support, their real concern is about money.

One would think Congress would get the lesson that spending valuable time investigating trivialities like sports is a waste of the public's time. It's not like the public has fully embraced the drawn-out inquest into Barry Bonds and Rogers Clemens, Senator Arlen Specter's crusade against the Patriots, and so on.

But no. Three misguided members of Congress now seek to interfere with college football, all in the name of pandering.

Three members of Congress want the Justice Department to investigate whether the Bowl Championship Series is an illegal enterprise.

Representatives Neil Abercrombie, Democrat of Hawaii; Lynn Westmoreland, Republican of Georgia; and Mike Simpson, Republican of Idaho, introduced a resolution saying the B.C.S. restricts trade because only the largest universities compete in its games. The resolution would require the Justice Department's antitrust division to investigate if the B.C.S. violates federal law.

The measure, if it passes, would put Congress on record as supporting a postseason playoff.

Hawaii? Check. Idaho? Check. Georgia? Check. No pandering going on here! Hilariously stupid quote of the month goes to Hawaii Democrat Neil Abercrombie:

"Who elected these N.C.A.A. people?" Abercrombie said at a news conference Thursday on Capitol Hill while gripping a souvenir University of Hawaii football. "Who are they to decide who competes for the championship?"

Never let facts get in the way of a good time folks! Imagine, private - not public like Congress - interests such as the NCAA determining how their own organizations are run? This is apparently scary stuff for the closet fascist the great people of Hawaii have elected. Best of all Abercrombie doesn't appear to realize that "those NCAA people" aren't deciding who competes for college football's championship, nor should they. It's in the hands of the institutions and the conferences themselves.

Exit question: What, no co-signature from any of Alabama's representatives?

I'm not really sure this is of utmost importance for Congress, but I support the discussion:

A Chicago congressman plans to summon university presidents to a hearing on whether college athletes should be paid, saying athletes are being exploited for their ability to help schools realize extravagant revenues.

Rep. Bobby Rush, chairman of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee, wants to know why college basketball and football players, in particular, aren't compensated for logging hundreds of hours for training, practices and games-free labor, he calls it-that can help institutions reap millions of dollars in TV and other revenues.

Frustratingly for the NCAA, this issue just won't go away. Ramogi Huma's doing his thing through the courts. Reggie Bush allegedly flaunted the NCAA's will on compensation last year. I think most people are sympathetic to both figures and athletes at large and don't understand the heavy-handedness about everything from work hours to the occasional meal on the side that is so thoroughly regulated.

It took overwhelming public demand to force the NCAA's direly reluctant hand in allowing Clemson (and many other) fans to donate money and services to Clemson player Ray Ray McElrathbey last year when he assumed custody of his younger brother as their mother fought a drug addiction.

The more these situations pile up, the more silly the NCAA looks. I'm not sure "compensation" is the solution, but certainly a greater level of understanding and willingness to recalibrate the rules might buy time and much-needed goodwill with athletes and the public.

(Via Ben Maller and Get the Picture)

Last Wednesday, Congress allocated some time to addressing the "lack of minority head coaches in college and NFL" issue. It's a serious and worthy issue, but I think for a while now its biggest advocates have been going about things inefficiently.

The basic assumption for some may be that the combination of "old boys networks" and just plain discrimination are the biggest obstables getting in the way of legitimate opportunities for minority head coaches. Although it's insane to argue in the face of that, I will say it may not be the major stumbling block preventing more hirings.

I think the real issue is a lack of minority coordinators.

Coaching is a funny business. Besides the informal buddy-buddy networks that do create opportunities for those within them, one other feature is fairly dominant: the Order of Operations. In school many years ago we all probably learned how to solve certain mathematic equations through the word PEMDAS. That is, Parenthesis, Exponents, Multiply, Divide, Add, Subtract.

Just as there's a natural order to basic math functions, there is a general order to ascending the coaching ladder. Although college and the NFL blend, young coaches must generally climb successive similar rungs to become head coaches.

In college, one's first position is often as a graduate assistant. The GA's are the lowest on the totem pole, often assisting position coaches and whatever else the head coach asks of them. After serving as GA's, they may jump to another GA spot at another school or be hired as an assistant/positition coach. Several years should follow at multiple schools assisting with various positions, learning lots of new ideas and ways to do things and networking with coaches from more than one school of thought.

Eventually, talented assistants will rise to the top and become offensive and defensive coordinators. This is a key point in a coaching career, because becoming an OC or DC is a lot like having that college degree, it gets you places. One also must manage an entire side of the ball, develop an offense or defense, develop game plans, create an agenda for the position coaches to follow and report to and work with the head coach. It's a lot of responsibility and one of those "sink or swim" jobs that can either elevate or destroy a career.

From a coordinator's position is where many coaches will launch their head coaching careers. There's almost no way around it except for a handful of coaches who somehow "pass go" without having been a coordinator (Mississippi's Ed Orgeron, for example).

A lack of minority head coaches indicates, at least in my mind, a lack in number or quality minority offensive and defensive coordinators. This should be the real push for those looking to see the necessary increase in minority head coaches. Lawsuits and embarrassment can only go so far when it's only reasonable that if there aren't many minority coordinators there won't be many head coaching opportunities.

Now, I don't have the hard data on how many minority coaches are coordinators in college and the NFL, but it makes sense that if talented minority coaches can saturate those ranks, head coaching opportunities will only continue to increase. Maybe I'm wrong and the proportion of minority coordinators is substantial enough that there should be more head coaches, but the coordinator issue remains important just the same.